Normalizing an inability of tens of millions of people to do a hard day’s work yet not be able to rent a decent apartment or afford health care isn’t the sign of a functional society. When the country in question is the richest in the world it’s the sign of something deeply wrong

Feb 9, 2022 · 10:59 AM UTC

89
400
29
2,106
Replying to @marwilliamson
We keep hearing the old tropes about freedom and capitalism being imperfect but… ‘better than the alternative(s).’ If any independent person is paid anything less than a living wage, then society is engaging in a form of exploitative servitude. This is a form of feudalism.
1
13
Replying to @marwilliamson
lukewarm take: People deserve to have a place to live regardless of whether they can do a full day's work or any fraction thereof
1
Replying to @marwilliamson
So true. Our clients who make $40-$50k a year (not bad by any means) can barely afford to find a decent studio apt in Denver. It’s an issue that needs to be addressed. Many properties require 3x monthly rent for gross income. Most studios start at $1700. $50k won’t get approved.
Replying to @marwilliamson
Chat me private
Replying to @marwilliamson
We live in a dysfunctional country that’s rotting.
Replying to @marwilliamson
Let's say this while we still can because @DHSgov is working to brand this kind of speech as "domestic terrorism". dhs.gov/news/2022/02/07/dhs-… Right, @secmayorkas ?
Replying to @marwilliamson
Thanks for pointing this out Marianne. Now do the right thing and help us remove the Democrats who control our Congress and all of our major cities and have made this country unlivable.
Replying to @marwilliamson
This is the same thing that is happening in Japan today. There is a divergence of opinion between the government, which is proceeding based on the kamikaze concept, and the people, who are concerned about the spread of infectious diseases.
Replying to @marwilliamson
Congress gang rapes us. You are included.
This tweet is unavailable
Addressing the tax code IS the most powerful way to deal with inequality.
3
2
1
27